Here is a new turn of events. An almost-new name shows up because Jim Allchin, who was recently pulled into the investigation (he thought he had peacefully retired after the irreparable Vista disaster), points his finger at Will Poole, who left company some months ago and shortly afterwards joined NComputing [1, 2, 3], a company that typically distributed GNU/Linux (although Windows options are available too). Poole was also seen involved with this collusion in our first post about the subject.

A surprise decision by Microsoft jeopardized its relationship with PC giant Hewlett-Packard a year before Windows Vista’s release, according to internal e-mails unsealed late Friday in U.S. District Court in Seattle. The messages, between top Microsoft and HP executives, shed new light on the behind-the-scenes turmoil that preceded the operating system’s troubled debut.

“You have demonstrated a complete lack of commitment to HP as a strategic partner and cost us a lot of money in the process,” wrote HP executive Richard Walker in a January 2006 message to then-Microsoft Windows chief Jim Allchin. “Your credibility is severely damaged in my organization.”

I had nothing to do with this. Will (Poole, another Windows executive) handled everything. I received a message that paul was going to call. Will said he would handle it. Paul called. I had not even had a chance to report his issues when Will told me he had solved them. (It did not sound like he had) I am not even in the detail of the issues

Pressured by Intel Corp., Microsoft Corp. relaxed the rules for a crucial Windows Vista marketing program — a move that let the chip maker sell older graphics chip sets that were incapable of meeting the original requirements, internal e-mails show.

High-ranking Microsoft and Intel executives were involved in a plan to re-write the Windows Vista Capable program to save both companies – and OEMs – millions of dollars, according to unsealed court documents.

What Else is New

We’re being told by Microsoft that the “old” Microsoft is just a thing of the past while Microsoft keeps liaising with oppressive regimes like China’s and Trump's; what will it take for media in Microsoft’s pocket to openly admit that it all boils down to publicity stunts and nice-sounding euphemisms?

The GNOME Board of Directors works for IBM and/or Microsoft at GitHub; it’s not entirely surprising that despite opposition from some GNOME developers the head of the GNOME Foundation, preceded by people who have since defected to Microsoft, described Dr. Richard Stallman as “reprehensible” and called for him to step down (from his very own thing, never mind the “G” in GNOME standing for GNU)

Principled, opinionated, self-governing individuals aren't any good for corporations looking to not only use their projects but to totally control those projects (copyleft licences such as GPL already make that hard enough for them, so it takes more time for legal 'hacks' such as software patents, "clown computing" and GitHub)

Certain groups that claim to represent the values of "Open Source" are in fact promoting the interests of Microsoft, GitHub etc. (i.e. monopoly or "open" as in a bunch of monopolies like Facebook and Microsoft sharing code snippets/resources over GitHub)

Torvalds and others who are middle-aged (or older) males are often torpedoed using weakly-backed allegations (or insinuations/innuendo) of sexism; that does not seem to matter and won't matter when they treat men the same (or worse)

Linus Torvalds was not fully canceled; nor was Richard Stallman, who's still heading the GNU Project (under conditions specified by those looking to oust him; people who code for Microsoft GitHub and many IBM employees)

General Hugh Shelton, Chairman of the Board of Red Hat, explains (keynote in 2011 Red Hat Summit/JBoss World) that he was introduced to the system as part of a military campaign; it basically helped war, not antiwar

Techrights examines Red Hat’s (IBM’s) hypocritical claims about the Free Software Foundation, founded by Richard Stallman back when IBM was the “big scary monopolist”; IBM employees were prominent among those pushing to oust Stallman from the GNU Project, which he founded, as well

The (in)famous letter against Richard Stallman (RMS), which was signed by many Red Hat employees with Microsoft (GitHub) accounts, doesn’t look particularly good in light of recent revelations/findings; it increasingly looks like IBM simply wants Microsoft-hosted and “permissively” licensed stuff, just like another project it announced yesterday and another that it promoted yesterday

One might not expect this from a so-called 'charity'; the Gates Foundation's critics are often met with unprecedented aggression, threats and retribution, which make one wonder if it's really a charity or a greedy cult of personalities (Bill and Melinda)

The assault on the media by Bill Gates is a subject not often explored by the media (maybe because a lot of it is already bribed by him); but we're beginning to gather new and important evidence that explains how critics are muzzled (even fired) and critical pieces spiked, never to see the light of day anywhere

Microsoft buying GitHub does not demonstrate that Microsoft loves Open Source (GitHub is not Open Source and may never be) but that it loves monopoly and coercion (what GitHub is all about and why it must be rejected)

The European Patent Office (EPO) keeps granting fake patents that cause a lot of real harm (examiners are pressured to play along and participate in this unlawful agenda); nobody is happy except those who profit from needless, frivolous lawsuits